RootsChat.Com
Research in Other Countries => United States of America => Topic started by: 001uk on Wednesday 01 September 10 19:51 BST (UK)
-
Hi,
I'm seeking the location of a business (c1910) called STOYLE & LEE. They were: "Carpenters & Builders". They undertook Jobbing Work and Alterations and also repaired furniture
The only further info I can offer is the business was housed in a two storey wooden shed behind a brick built two storey detached house on a tree lined avenue in a residential area.
Either STOYLE or LEE had the first name of TED and was married(?) with a small child c1910
-
Is the small child in the photo? If so, can you determine if it was a boy or a girl? If it isn't against any copyright regulations, can you add the photo, so we may get a better look?
-
Is there some indication that the photo was taken in the states? Could it possibly have been taken in Canada, or in the UK?
-
Hi Lisa,
Thanks for your reply.
The photo postcard has an AZO stamp box with corner upright tri-angles which suggests to me it USA. Judging by the style of house this supports my theory. The child is looking out of an upstairs window with possibly it's mother alongside but could be an older child. The baby looks male.
I'd add a photo but when I expand the Attach a photo link I don't get the attach facility! Am I doing something wrong? (I am a new boy)!!
-
I'm not sure how to add photos (my son helped me the last time). Hopefully, someone will advise.
I'm not sure what AZO is? ???
-
I found an example of AZO. You learn something new everyday. ;)
-
I think the lookup requests area doesn't allow for photos. I'll try moving the thread.
-
Thank you so much, Shelly. I'll check back here later...my break is over.
-
1910 census
There is no Theodore or Ted Stoyle. There is an Edward Stoyle in Manhattan, NY, NY [age 46, boarder, single, b. England, carpenter, automobile]. The only other Edward Stoyle is a young child.
There are 147 Theodore or Ted Lees, unfortunately.
The picture might help to narrow down the region of the country.
Stoyle isn't a very common surname. There are Stoyles listed in:
Dunkirk, Chautauqua, NY
Philadelphia, PA
Seattle, WA
Salt Lick, Perry, Ohio
Huntington, Suffolk, NY
Buena Vista, VA
Opelousas, Landry, LA
Pinedale, Navajo, AZ
Burlington, Des Moines, Iowa
Stoughton, Norfolk, MA
Mt Vernon, Knox, Ohio
Attleborough, Bristol, MA
Clarksburg, Harrison, WV
Portage, Houghton, Michigan
Manhattan, NY, NY
Union, Allegheny, PA
Boston, Suffolk, MA
Mt Vernon, Westchester, NY
Edgerton, Hanson, South Dakota
Mayfield, Grand Traverse, Michigan
Buffalo, Erie, New York
Sadorus, Champaign, Illinois
Swan Creek, Fulton, Ohio
College, Knox, Ohio
Justice Precinct 3, Knox, Texas
Sidney, Cheyenne, Nebraska
Moscow, Muscatine, Iowa
Decorah, Winneshiek, Iowa
Saugerties, Ulster, New York
Everett, Snohomish, Washington
Burlington, Des Moines, Iowa
Pocotaligo, Madison, Georgia
Reading, Adams, Pennsylvania
Douglasville, Douglas, Georgia
edited to add: Sorry, I missed one Edward Stoyle, but he was a farmer.
-
I found an example of AZO. You learn something new everyday. ;)
Hi Lisa,
AZO is a name for a type of paper photo postcards were printed on mostly in the US. The "stamp box" is the area where the postage stamp was to be affixed (NE corner). The paper name was incorporated in the box (sometimes) together with symbols. It's possible to date the paper from these symbols.
I have checked the symbols and AZO with 4 triangles pointed up is 1904-1918.
More info can be found on this subject on an excellent website for a US postcard auctioneer:
http://www.playle.com/realphoto/index.php
-
I think the lookup requests area doesn't allow for photos. I'll try moving the thread.
Hi Shelley, thanks for your help! Have added the images to my original post.
-
Can you scan it at higher resolution?
I am mystified by the trees. They do not look like something from the eastern US to me. Could they be eucalyptus?
-
There is something written under the word CARD. It looks like "Stoyle W/Z Builder." I think the house is built in a city.
I'm not placing it in Brooklyn, New York, but the width of the house looks about as wide as a building lot in Brooklyn. And it seems to be built on a double lot, which was typical when Brooklyn's neighborhoods nearer to Manhattan (Brooklyn Heights, what's now called Carroll Gardens, Boerum Hill, Fort Green, and Park Slope) still had lots of single-family homes (as opposed to the brownstone row houses that are prevalent there today).
On the far right is a wall covered with ivy; it looks to be three or four stories tall, perhaps brick but may more likely be brownstone. You still see ivy covering the exposed side walls of brownstones at the end of a row in Brooklyn, as well as in other places, I presume.
It's also very common today in Brooklyn to use the word "garden" to describe the small back yard area behind a house. Was that true circa 1910 in the U.K.?
In the U.S., it's standard to call the upper floor of a building with two floors the second story. I've heard that floor called the first floor in the U.K. The writer uses first floor and second floor, and he has adopted the American spelling of "story."
But, if had he been in the U.S. for any length of time, would he have been more likely to use dollars than pounds when speaking of money? Or was he using pounds for the sake of his correspondents?
The names Sally and Tom (I think) are in the text of the post card. Could Sally be the woman in the window. Frank and Timmie (?) are the recipients. Perhaps these latter two are brothers of Ted? Maybe they are together in one of the U.K censuses.
John
:o :o :o
-
Hello Erato
Many thanks for all you impressive input. I appreciate the time & effort you spent.My money is on Manhattan right now.
Regards~001uk
-
Hi John,
Thanks again for replying.
The inscription Stoyle W/Z Builder should be disregarded as this was an unerased pencil comment made recently when it was thought the card was British.
It does appear to be ivy growing very straight upwards: on a building rather than a tree.
"Garden" was certainly used in Britain for a plot of land adjoining a property whether front or back. It is still in use today! I have a hunch the chap (in the photo) was British and ventured to the US. Postcards were often sent within envelopes to keep private...away from the prying eyes of the nosey postman back home perhaps.
The story of floors is interesting. I take on board your American suggestion. In the UK generally, the 1st floor would be upstairs on a two floor build.
I'm sure including Pounds is for the benefit of the recipients. A Briton abroad still has the pound sign in the brain! (Even today most Brits would NOT want anything else)!! However, what is highly unusual is the figure to preceed the £ sign......definitely not British!
The last two lines are interesting. He writes:
"..Sally (?) wrote home to say Tom was manager of...at(?) 10 £ a week, she is the Bloodiest liar".
Alas his writing is not clear and there are many mistakes with the content not flowing. Timmie presumeably would be a shortened version of Timothy, not a terribly common name then. Could it be a child? Could it be a female's name? I'll have a crack at the census for your suggestion of left at home brothers (or a sister)!
Thanks for your terrific interest.
-
I checked American WWI Reg Cards...after a quick search I did not see a Stoyle or Lee (born in England) with the occupation carpenter. I may have missed records, though.
I agree with Erato, a couple of the limbs do look like eucalyptus.
-
Is there any date to indicate what month the card was sent? The photo was apparently taken four months earlier, which would give an idea of the season. The tree in the background seems to be just leafing out or losing its leaves, whereas those in the foreground are fully leafed.
It’s that very tall straight pole-like tree with no branches that confounds me. It goes straight into the ground with no sign of roots at the surface - like eucalyptus here in Ecuador. Plus, in my experience, street trees are not pruned like that in the US northeast. The other two trees in the foreground [left and right] could possibly be elms. They were common street trees before Dutch elm disease took hold in about the 1940s.
-
This could be a photo of Edward Stoyle, born in 1864 in Scotland, where his father, John Clarke Stoyle, was stationed as a soldier. Edward followed him into the army for several years: his army record can be seen on "Findmypast". He appears in the 1901 census as a carpenter in Bedwelty, Wales. He married there in 1904 but left his wife and went to the U.S.A., apparently before the 1911 census, when he did not show up in Britain. He is said to have married again in the U.S.A. At the end of his life he was ordered ashore to hospital in New York when about to return to Britain and he died in March 1930.
The man in the photo looks tall, and this Edward was over 6 feet in height (and dark-haired), according to his army papers. The language in the postcard sounds a bit military, too.
Certainly this Edward was the "unmarried" Edward, aged 46, whom Erato found in Manhattan in the 1910 census.
-
Hi all, especially Ambra: Welcome to Rootschat. Could you post any additional information on Edward Stoyle? I searched the New York City Death Index for his death in 1930, but found nothing.
I also searched for him in the 1920 U.S. census (on FamilySearch Pilot, which is not the best site to for the 1920 census). I found nothing there either.
I'm wondering: If Edard Stoyle is identified, then could his partner be Tom (or Thomas) Lee? "Tom" is mentioned on the postcard as the manager.
If Edward Stoyle was living in Manhattan in 1910, then there is a possibility that the house in the picture might also be in Manhattan, and I'd say Upper Manhattan, since row-house development and taller buildings were being constructed at that time in Midtown and Lower Manhattan.
One thing that puzzles me is the height of the windows of the house above the ground. One would expect, with New York's winters being as snowy as they are, that the window sills would be much further off the ground.
I will be at the New York Public Library this week and will find out if there are any commercial directories for New York for the period 1910-1920.
Regards,
John :o :o :o
-
This could be a photo of Edward Stoyle, born in 1864 in Scotland, where his father, John Clarke Stoyle, was stationed as a soldier. Edward followed him into the army for several years: his army record can be seen on "Findmypast". He appears in the 1901 census as a carpenter in Bedwelty, Wales. He married there in 1904 but left his wife and went to the U.S.A., apparently before the 1911 census, when he did not show up in Britain. He is said to have married again in the U.S.A. At the end of his life he was ordered ashore to hospital in New York when about to return to Britain and he died in March 1930.
The man in the photo looks tall, and this Edward was over 6 feet in height (and dark-haired), according to his army papers. The language in the postcard sounds a bit military, too.
Certainly this Edward was the "unmarried" Edward, aged 46, whom Erato found in Manhattan in the 1910 census.
Hello Ambra,
I'm impressed! What a selection of info: very many thanks for taking the time & trouble.I think we're homing in on him.
Thanks again.
-
Hi all, especially Ambra: Welcome to Rootschat. Could you post any additional information on Edward Stoyle? I searched the New York City Death Index for his death in 1930, but found nothing.
I also searched for him in the 1920 U.S. census (on FamilySearch Pilot, which is not the best site to for the 1920 census). I found nothing there either.
I'm wondering: If Edward Stoyle is identified, then could his partner be Tom (or Thomas) Lee? "Tom" is mentioned on the postcard as the manager.
If Edward Stoyle was living in Manhattan in 1910, then there is a possibility that the house in the picture might also be in Manhattan, and I'd say Upper Manhattan, since row-house development and taller buildings were being constructed at that time in Midtown and Lower Manhattan.
One thing that puzzles me is the height of the windows of the house above the ground. One would expect, with New York's winters being as snowy as they are, that the window sills would be much further off the ground.
I will be at the New York Public Library this week and will find out if there are any commercial directories for New York for the period 1910-1920.
Regards,
John :o :o :o
Hi John,
Thanks for your contribution every extra bit of info helps and i look forward to seeing anything you might turn up after visiting the NY library. It's becoming a fascinating inter-continental story.
Appreciate your help.
-
The front of the house is a bit odd (I thought). It wasn't until John mentioned the height of the windows in reference to snow that now makes me wonder if the house (and property) is actually lower than the level of the road?
If you look at the door and frame, it is just "there", there doesn't appear to be a threshold. What is next to the man, the two supports with a bar? It could be used for horses, or maybe not. Looking at the man in relation to the gate behind him, allowing for differences between items in the background, he still seems a bit tall to be standing on the same level as the gate. Could there be a step down to the front door, and a step down to the driveway (which would be a good reason to have the railing across the front of the house, where there might not be a step down)? There appears to be a line on the ground where the man is standing, that runs from him to the next building. Could this indicate that the property is lower than the road? Also, if the man is on the same road level as the door, still allowing for distance and perspective, he seems too tall for the door. ???
PS Hi Ambra, welcome to RootsChat. :)
-
Looking at the 1910 Manhattan census that Erato found, perhaps it is just coincidence, but living next door to Edward Stoyle, age 46, born England, immigrated 1895, Carpenter, Automobile is:
Leahy?, Thomas, age 28, married (family is listed on the image), born Ireland, immigrated 1902, Carpenter, House.
Update: Thomas lived two houses away, sorry.
-
Hi all: I checked microfilm copies of a few directories for Manhattan (1911, 1912, and 1924) and Brooklyn (1913, I think). Manhattan directories include the Bronx.
I found no listing for any individual named Stoyle nor for any business named Stoyle and Lee. Is it possible that the business might have been Lee and Stoyle?
Ignore the last sentence. The card says Stoyle and Lee.
Regards.
John :o :o :o
-
I agree, it does look like there’s a step down to the front door and a railing protecting the excavated space in front of the window. To me, that’s one more thing that makes me think it’s not the Northeast. To me it looks more like the South - say North Carolina.
-
Hi again: Lisa, your mention of a step down to the front door made me take another look at the picture. You're right. There is a step down, and that reminded me that I lived on the ground floor of a Brooklyn brownstone for several years that had a step down to the entrance. "English basement" is the term used to describe that sort of layout--partially below and partially above the grade of the street.
My windows on the street side of the brownstone were about the same height off the ground as the windows in the picture. In 1996 we had 17 snowstorms, with a total of 87 inches of snow. The largest single accumulation was 20 inches, the drift were about halfway up the window.
The shutters were what threw me off in the picture. I didn't have shutters on my windows. And I didn't have them because there were steel bars over the windows, which made it impossible to open and close shutters. Now I'm inclined to think that this house is New York.
Regards,
John :o :o :o
-
I’ve seen those step-down-a-bit constructions in Boston, too, but in more urban settings. That little bit of unfenced front yard [looks like dirt] and the roofline suggest the south to me.
I’ve blown up the bark and the leaves but I can’t make out what they are. It looks like there are many branch scars going all the way up - as if it were some self pruning species; that's probably what suggested Eucalyptus to me in the first place.
-
The front of the house is a bit odd (I thought). It wasn't until John mentioned the height of the windows in reference to snow that now makes me wonder if the house (and property) is actually lower than the level of the road?
If you look at the door and frame, it is just "there", there doesn't appear to be a threshold. What is next to the man, the two supports with a bar? It could be used for horses, or maybe not. Looking at the man in relation to the gate behind him, allowing for differences between items in the background, he still seems a bit tall to be standing on the same level as the gate. Could there be a step down to the front door, and a step down to the driveway (which would be a good reason to have the railing across the front of the house, where there might not be a step down)? There appears to be a line on the ground where the man is standing, that runs from him to the next building. Could this indicate that the property is lower than the road? Also, if the man is on the same road level as the door, still allowing for distance and perspective, he seems too tall for the door. ???
PS Hi Ambra, welcome to RootsChat. :)
Hello Lisa,
Thanks for replying.
Firstly there isn't any snow! I think the photo is just bright, possibly sunlight.
The door has 2/3 steps down which is why (I suspect) there's a bar round the window to stop people falling down.He's standing, or rather perching, on a small step to the driveway. Due to the way he is standing his heels are lower than his toes which makes him look tall(er) in perspective to the trellis gate behind him. Having said that though he does appear to be a tall guy anyway.
Where the lower ink "x" is the drop looks much lower a good 6" so yes the property beyond is lower than road level.
-
I've added a enlargement of the sign. It's definitely STOYLE & LEE!
The big disappointment is they left out the telephone number....which probably would've solved it!!
-
Hi 001uk: They may not have put a phone number on the sign because at the time the photo was taken they might not have had a telephone. What looks like a bare tree trunk in the front of the photo on the left may actually be a telephone pole. It has wires wrapped around it. These may be guy wires or they might be telephone wires.
The foliage on the left is attached to the branches that you can see just behind the pole in front.
Could you enlarge the right side of the photo (showing the pole) and attach it?
Regards,
John :o :o :o
-
Could the bar in front of the window (you can also see that there seems to be one to the left of the front door) be a hitching post for carriage horses? As well as protecting the house itself.
Incidentally, you can see the drop off by looking at the foundation, which in front is about as high as the fellow's knees.
John :o :o :o
-
He wasn't a good speller, or at least his sign maker wasn't.
Don't you think it's too tall to be a utility pole?
>>>>>
I have looked for Edward Stoyle in 1920 on Ancestry. No luck. And I haven't found any immigration record for him, either.
-
“I had these done 4 months ago, purposely to send you, the chance came and I took the opportunity to have them done, just to show what Sally? wrote home to say Tom was manager of at 10 £ a week, she is the bloodiest liar. Ted”
Does this say Sally? And who would she have been? Ted’s wife? Tom’s wife? Or maybe a sister?
-
Yes, it was obvious that the sign maker did the work too "promtly."
The only thing that makes me question whether it's a telephone pole is that it appears to a little crooked--to the right. But that could be an effect created by the tree foliage.
-
Hi 001uk: They may not have put a phone number on the sign because at the time the photo was taken they might not have had a telephone. What looks like a bare tree trunk in the front of the photo on the left may actually be a telephone pole. It has wires wrapped around it. These may be guy wires or they might be telephone wires.
The foliage on the left is attached to the branches that you can see just behind the pole in front.
Could you enlarge the right side of the photo (showing the pole) and attach it?
Regards,
John :o :o :o
Hi John,
Yes, quite so re the telephone. Perhaps they were waiting to be connected or it had changed.
The "bare tree trunk" may well be a phone pole but as it goes up it narrows. Was this normal in that part of the world? In the UK we had (and still do have) uniform wooden poles.There are wires strapped around it but are certainly guys keeping something taught/in place and are not telephone cables.However, there are cables running along level with the apex of the roof.Four in total but they are faint and will not come up on a scan.
I have also just noticed metal pegs running up the "bare tree trunk" directly facing, taking over where the wooden steps finish.
There is no pole at the right! At the far edge there's a lot of ivy growing up to where the leaves start. This is a building.
Thanks for your continued interest~Paul
-
It certainly looks like Sally. She could be wife, sister, relative, friend.
The trouble is finding any sign of Stoyle in the U.S.
-
He wasn't a good speller, or at least his sign maker wasn't.
Don't you think it's too tall to be a utility pole?
>>>>>
I have looked for Edward Stoyle in 1920 on Ancestry. No luck. And I haven't found any immigration record for him, either.
He might have been one P short of a pod but good at carpentry!
I don't think the "pole" is a utility pole as it narrows towards the top and is an irregular shape...although I stand corrected.
-
“I had these done 4 months ago, purposely to send you, the chance came and I took the opportunity to have them done, just to show what Sally? wrote home to say Tom was manager of at 10 £ a week, she is the bloodiest liar. Ted”
Does this say Sally? And who would she have been? Ted’s wife? Tom’s wife? Or maybe a sister?
Yes, it does look like Sally.Not sure what else it could be as it's clearly someone's name.
It's odd the way he's written the amount of Sterling. Any Briton would write it £10 and not 10 £
-
I have also just noticed metal pegs running up the "bare tree trunk" directly facing, taking over where the wooden steps finish.
There is no pole at the right! At the far edge there's a lot of ivy growing up to where the leaves start. This is a building.
Thanks for your continued interest~Paul
Sorry, I meant the left side of the photo. I wanted an enlargement of the pole to see if there were any spikes in it or other telltale signs of the telephone pole. But your mention of metal pegs seems to confirm that it is a telephone pole.
If this photo is from 1910 or earlier or depicts something put in five years or so earlier than when it was taken, then I would wouldn't be too concerned about the tapering. I notice blemishes on the pole that remind of the blemishes on wooden telephone poles in the U.S. These poles are usually cedar, and this looks like the trunk of a cedar.
But if you can enlarge the pole itself, we might get a better look at the dark blemishes (probably where branches grew from the trunk).
John :o :o :o
-
Yes, it was obvious that the sign maker did the work too "promtly."
The only thing that makes me question whether it's a telephone pole is that it appears to a little crooked--to the right. But that could be an effect created by the tree foliage.
It is crooked furthermore at the top it becomes about half the diameter of the base.Would telephone poles been used that were so irregular? OR was it a dead tree that the phone company decided to utilise?!
-
It is crooked furthermore at the top it becomes about half the diameter of the base.Would telephone poles been used that were so irregular? OR was it a dead tree that the phone company decided to utilise?!
If it were a dead tree, it would have to have been hardwood. And it would have had to be dead for some time but not rotted.
If you look at it in relation to the sidewalk, it was put next to or appears to have grown directly next to the sidewalk.
I think it might have been a temporary pole put in by the telephone company, using an irregular shaped pole. That's what the guy wires are there for. To keep it stable. Above, you mentioned wires: I see one spiraled twice around the pole, but I also see what appear to be two wires above the roofline of the house. These are pulled taught and are running straight. They look like actual telephone wires.
Perhaps we can't see the crossbars of the pole. They might be small and hidden by the dark of the foliage.
I also noticed that the sidewalk is light in color, like recently poured concrete. Older neighborhoods in New York, particularly in Brooklyn, had (and still have) bluestone sidewalks. These are made with 3 foot by 4 foot slabs with a dark, bluish hue, hence the name. You can still trip and kill yourself in my old neighborhood in Brooklyn on those sidewalks. But not all streets in the same neighborhood would have had these bluestone sidewalks.
What we need is to find Edward (Ted) Stoyle in the U.S. or in the U.K.
-
I’m not convinced we should be looking for an Edward/Ted Stoyle. From the information in the postcard we know that:
1) Tom was the manager of Stoyle and Lee. So I think we can assume that Tom was either Tom Stoyle or Tom Lee because the business doesn’t lookk big enough to have had a manager who was not one of the owners. We don’t know Tom’s nationality.
2) Sally, whoever she was, must have been British because it says that she wrote home. Ted was also apparently British and, whoever he was, knew Sally well enough to know what she had said in that letter. He also knew the layout of the shop.
3) We don’t know who the man in the photo is. It could be either Tom or Ted [or possibly even someone else].
-
I think this is a case of she said, he said. Ted called Sally a liar, which means either that Tom is not manager of Stoyle and Lee or that he does not earn 10 pounds per week.
If Sally's lie is about Tom being the manager, then perhaps Ted is or is not the manager. If Ted is lying in saying that Sally is lying, then Tom could be the manager.
Ted could be Ted (Edward) Stoyle or another Ted.
The one post by Ambra confirms the existence of an Edward Stoyle, who worked as a carpenter and apparently came to the U.S. after 1904 and before 1910.
I only suggest finding Ted (Edward) Stoyle because it normally would be easier to trace than Tom Lee.
-
Tree/pole at left herewith. Hope it's a high enough res to see.Took several atempts to chop it down in size.
The tree is in a small area of turf/mud. The actual pavement does look a little like fresh concrete but it's exposure doesn't help.
-
It certainly looks like a dead trunk and it has foot things on the side, so I agree that it's a utility pole.
-
Could be. I figured that Sally’s “lie” was simply exaggerating the size of the business that Tom managed.
I think it is more likely that Tom’s last name was Lee because because he was described as the manager, not the owner, and Lee is the second name on the sign.
I was imagining that Sally was Tom’s wife and the sister of Ted. Sally wrote home to brag about her husband’s business and Ted sent the card to show what it was really like.
In that case, we don’t know what Stoyle’s first name was and we don’t know the surname of Ted and Sally.
-
I have checked the England/Wales 1901 census. There isn't an Edward, Edwin or Ted listed.Interestingly though all the Stoyles that had a wood/building related trade came from Devon with just three exceptions.
Just as a matter of interest i ran the surname through the GB Surname Profiler.
(http://www.britishsurnames.co.uk/surnames/STOYLE/1881census)
In 1881 there were 153 Stoyles in GB (with 158 in the US).x94 of them came from Devon with Plymouth the top town.
For Tom: zero. For Thomas:
Thomas Stoyle age 12 Born & living in Totnes Devon
Thomas H Stoyle age 56 Born Jersey. At the census he was in Lambeth London working as a Plasterer
-
Guy wires to the left and right. But they are in an odd position. I've usually seen guy wires on telephone poles attached to stakes in the ground near the pole. The wires here are going sideways.
And those footholds. Wooden. They are old. I mean old old. More recent vintage poles have no footholds near the bottom. They are foothold holders (if I can coin a phrase), with a spike slipped over the head end of a metal holder driven into the pole.
When in doubt, Wikipedia sometimes helps. According to the "History" section of the article there (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_pole), early telephone/telegraph poles tapered, and they were about 30 feet tall.
I think this was a temporary pole. No preservative on it, and not the straightest arrow in the quiver.
I also noticed a small wooden stake in the ground next to the sidewalk going to the front door. There's a round dark blemish near the bottom of the pole, the stake is at 10 o'clock or 10:30 from that blemish. If you keep enlarging the image with the magnifying glass, the stake becomes clearer. It looks like the remnant of a built form to pour the concrete sidewalk. I thought the sidewalk looked new. I think it's very new. Perhaps done by Stoyle and Lee...
Too bad that pole is where it is. Either just above the door, on the bottom part of the cornice or on the door itself there is likely be a house number.
John :o :o :o
-
Who received this card? Do we know who Frank and Timmie[??] are?
-
The card was addressed to Frank and Timmie.
-
Hi John,
The guy wires are at an angle with the right one going to the property to the right i think.
I reckon you're correct it was a temporary pole.
Along with the stake you discovered there's another at the corner of the earthen area by the footpath directly in front of the unknown gent.This would cement your theory about the new sidewalk.
It's always the case with unknown photos there's always the what if factor. What if the photographer had stood a bit more to the left we would have the door #.What if they'd got the phone # on the sign.
-
The card was addressed to Frank and Timmie.
Certainly Frank
if it's not Timmie it's difficult to judge what else it could be!
Vinnie?
-
Vinnie, maybe.
I take it you don't know who they are.
-
Hi John,
The guy wires are at an angle with the right one going to the property to the right i think.
I reckon you're correct it was a temporary pole.
Along with the stake you discovered there's another at the corner of the earthen area by the footpath directly in front of the unknown gent.This would cement your theory about the new sidewalk.
It's always the case with unknown photos there's always the what if factor. What if the photographer had stood a bit more to the left we would have the door #.What if they'd got the phone # on the sign.
The guy wires could go to permanent poles on either side of this temporary pole. I think my theory would be further cemented if I could see the second stake you mention. My image only bitmaps when I magnify it too much. But I did notice, with the increased magnification, that a few of the foundation stones directly below the ground-floor window and a few stones to the right of the window have been repointed. They probably stole some of the sidewalk cement from themselves to do the job. Perhaps all of this improvement means that one of them had bought the house recently.
-
I go for Timmie. In the text of the card, the m in "from" --in the top line--has two "humps," while the m in "timber," in the third line, and "came," further down, both have three humps. Just a function of the fellow's writing.
With that, I have to sign off--an hour or so ago.
I sent a message to a Rootschatter with impressive research skills and lots of enthusiasm, inviting her to have a look. Maybe new eyes will find something in the online records that has been overlooked.
-
This could be a photo of Edward Stoyle, born in 1864 in Scotland, where his father, John Clarke Stoyle, was stationed as a soldier. Edward followed him into the army for several years: his army record can be seen on "Findmypast". He appears in the 1901 census as a carpenter in Bedwelty, Wales. He married there in 1904 but left his wife and went to the U.S.A., apparently before the 1911 census, when he did not show up in Britain. He is said to have married again in the U.S.A. At the end of his life he was ordered ashore to hospital in New York when about to return to Britain and he died in March 1930.
The man in the photo looks tall, and this Edward was over 6 feet in height (and dark-haired), according to his army papers. The language in the postcard sounds a bit military, too.
Certainly this Edward was the "unmarried" Edward, aged 46, whom Erato found in Manhattan in the 1910 census.
But the Edward Stoyle in Manhattan in 1910 claimed he had immigrated in 1895 and that his naturalization papers were filed.
-
I don't think this has been mentioned...is it possible to enlarge the man's face, so we may guess his age? I think you at one time mentioned one or two people in the window? I cannot see them; would it be possible to enlarge that?
Finally, does the man have any identifying items on him: a pin in his jacket, a pocket watch, etc.?
Ted mentions I have done this, I have done that - perhaps he could be Stoyle, since his name is first (on the sign)? ??? Again, this may have been mentioned, but Tom is manager, so possibly he might be Lee and not Stoyle (if Tom is even one of them!).
Is that a mailbox on the gate? On second thought, perhaps the gate is open and the "mailbox" is on the inside of the gate.
-
Circa 1910 (I cannot view further details), there are 9 Stoyle's sailing to the UK. Two passengers (whom may not have even sailed in the same year) are S Stoyle and Carrie Lee Stoyle. ???
-
Carrie Lee Stoyle was an actress who travelled from Philadelphia to Liverpool on the SS Haverford in May 1908.
S. Stoyle travelled in 1910 from Yokohama.
-
Oh well, thank you anyway. ;)
-
Sorry, I'm forgetting what has already been mentioned. Has anyone tried to find out if there was a Frank Stoyle in England c1910?
-
I don’t think we know what Frank’s surname was. It might help to know more about the context of this postcard. How is it connected to 001uk’s family?
It seems to me all we know is that Tom, Ted, Sally, Frank and Timmie were all known to each other - either family or friends. Tom was probably either a Stoyle or a Lee [more likely Lee, in my opinion]. Ted, Sally, Frank and Timmie were all probably British. We don’t know the nationality of Tom Lee/Stoyle. We don’t know the identity of the man in the photo - but he is probably either Ted or Tom.
-
Hi Erato:
I'm just trying to research other avenues, since Stoyle & Lee apparently don't want to be found. I was wondering if any of the people mentioned on the postcard were other Stoyle family members.
I agree, if we knew the connection to 001uk's family, it might help.
-
Vinnie, maybe.
I take it you don't know who they are.
I think it's more like Timmie.
Alas, I don't know anything about the Stoyles or Lees.
-
I checked the England/Wales on line 1901 census and I could not find a STOYLE in Bedwelty, Wales!
Please would you give further details
Thanks
-
Sorry, I'm forgetting what has already been mentioned. Has anyone tried to find out if there was a Frank Stoyle in England c1910?
Hi Lisa,
According to the on line 1911 census for England/Wales these were the only two males that fit with the name Frank/Francis:
STOYLE FRANCIS VICTOR born 1900 age 11 East Stonehouse Devonshire
STOYLE LESLIE FRANK born 1907 age 4 Tavistock Devonshire
-
Hi Erato:
I'm just trying to research other avenues, since Stoyle & Lee apparently don't want to be found. I was wondering if any of the people mentioned on the postcard were other Stoyle family members.
I agree, if we knew the connection to 001uk's family, it might help.
I suspect they were.
My family has no connection at all with the Stoyles or Lees.I know zero about them!
My money is on Ted being the chap in the photo!
-
I don't think this has been mentioned...is it possible to enlarge the man's face, so we may guess his age? I think you at one time mentioned one or two people in the window? I cannot see them; would it be possible to enlarge that?
Finally, does the man have any identifying items on him: a pin in his jacket, a pocket watch, etc.?
Ted mentions I have done this, I have done that - perhaps he could be Stoyle, since his name is first (on the sign)? ??? Again, this may have been mentioned, but Tom is manager, so possibly he might be Lee and not Stoyle (if Tom is even one of them!).
Is that a mailbox on the gate? On second thought, perhaps the gate is open and the "mailbox" is on the inside of the gate.
Face scanned at 12800dpi the highest on my scanner.Still doesn't come up that well.
He's wearing a collar which is typical with a slightly older person than that of the date of the postcard. So, I would suggest he's mid 50s possibly a shade older.No lapel pins/badges
Very polished shoes (plus the way his feet are angled-at ease) might suggest ex Army?!!
Mail box is on the inside as indeed the gate is open.
-
The faces are in the top right window.Difficult to age the female at the left.Could be mid 20s.certainly there is a child with her of about 3 years?
-
RE The telephone.
Are there directories for Manhattan of the period (1918-20s)at all?
Although there is no number on the board Messrs STOYLE & LEE clearly had it in mind otherwise they wouldn't have made provision in their notice. A business would have needed one after all.
-
Are we certain that the Edward Stoyle in Manhattan in 1910 is somehow connected? He supposedly immigrated in 1895 but I have found no record of this. I have searched the 1900 US census with no luck; also the 1905 NY census and the 1920 US census, ditto. Also NY births, marriages and deaths - no luck. Also city directories - zero.
Other than the fact that someone named Edward might be called Ted, and that he was a carpenter, what reason is there to think that Manhattan is the right place to be looking?
-
Are you sure the postcard was mailed (in an envelope) to someone in England?
PS Thank you for the photo enlargements.
-
Good question; I wondered, too. There are some Stoyles in the US who might work as recipients; in Ohio and upstate NY.
-
Are you sure the postcard was mailed (in an envelope) to someone in England?
PS Thank you for the photo enlargements.
[/quote
The postcard was, I presume, mailed in an envelope but I could not tell you if the UK was it's destination.
It's presumed it's destination was the UK as the writer uses Sterling to express an amount of money.If it were going inland surely the writer would use dollars? UNLESS he was writing to fellow Brits in the US of course. The postcard was purchased,by me, in England.
The writer also calls the wood "timber"and refers to the "first and second floors" terms more British than American I believe.
Reading it again I'm convinced Ted is the writer and Sally his wife.....but I stand corrected!
-
Hi Everyone,
Referring back to reply 17 from Ambra and the question asked on reply 64 by 001UK. Just posting to give a little background on the Edward Stoyle who was quoted. He did marry in Bedwelty in Q3 1904. The Father John Stoyle died in Bedwelty in March 1902 and Elizabeth his Mother in Dec 1904. According to a family tree the fathers occupation was Board of Trade Inspector. I have'nt found the family yet in 1871 but the siblings of Edward are listed as John Clarke Stoyle 1853 - 1885. George Henry Stoyle 1855 - 1930. Thomas Stoyle 1857 - 1904. William Stoyle 1863 - 1941. Elizabeth Stoyle 1870. Arthur Stoyle 1871 - 1960. Very well travelled family most of the births are in different locations around the UK and including Scotland. As yet I have'nt been able to check them out. I also checked out all the US Census and Passenger records as d Erato did much earlier and found nothing apart from the 1910 possibility.
This shows the Edward Stoyle referred to:-
1901 Wales Census - Civil parish: Bedwellty - Ecclesiastical parish: Bedwellty St Sannan -Town: Blackwood. Monmouthshire. Wales.
John C Stoyle 77 Born Launceston, Cornwall, England. The initial "C" stands for Clarke. Pensioner - Royal Engineers
Elizabeth Stoyle 71 Born Southampotn. Hampshire.
Edward Stoyle 36 Born Methlic, Aberdeenshire, Scotland. Carpenter. Worker.
In 1891 I suspect this is also Edward Stoyle although it says born Essex - no Edward Stoyle was listed for that County on the BMD Records - it also may show he had a Military background. Also interestingly the 2 others William and Arthur are the correct ages for his brothers.
1891 Census Civil parish - St Giles County - Essex
Cavalry and Artillery Barracks
Edward Stoyle 26
Arthur Stoyle 19
William Stoyle 25
1881 Wales Census Montgomery
Hannah Davies 59
John C. Stoyle 57 Boarder. Born Cornwall. Civil Assist Ordinance Survey C S O Officer
Edward Stoyle 16 Boarder. Born Scotland. Civil Assist Ordinance Survey C S O Officer
The Mother Elizabeth and other siblings are in Bedwellty - 1881 Wales Census
Elizabeth Stoyle 48
William Stoyle 14
Elizabeth Jane Stoyle 11
Arthur Stoyle 9
Regards
Sandra
-
Are you sure the postcard was mailed (in an envelope) to someone in England?
PS Thank you for the photo enlargements.
[/quote
The postcard was, I presume, mailed in an envelope but I could not tell you if the UK was it's destination.
It's presumed it's destination was the UK as the writer uses Sterling to express an amount of money.If it were going inland surely the writer would use dollars? UNLESS he was writing to fellow Brits in the US of course. The postcard was purchased,by me, in England.
The writer also calls the wood "timber"and refers to the "first and second floors" terms more British than American I believe.
Reading it again I'm convinced Ted is the writer and Sally his wife.....but I stand corrected!
I think that your purchase of it in England is proof enough that it was sent to England. Unless a British recipient in the U.S. took it back to the U.K. Did the seller tell you where and how he/she obtained it?
Americans use--and probably used at the time of the photo--"lumber" for "timber." And I guess I should have used "pavement" instead of "sidewalk"!
Sandra: Thanks for posting the information on the Stoyles. Helpful in making them real.
John :o :o :o
-
Hi John
I agree, I think it's destination was the UK.
Have yet to ascertain the chain of purchase.
You carry on using sidewalk....when in Rome etc.
-
I agree that the postcard was more than likely mailed to the UK. However, when I was a child and visiting Ireland, my mum met whom we thought was a distant relative. For 30 years we thought we knew how we were related. About 5 years ago I found out we were not related by the common ancestor "John". Ever since then, I've been very careful about assuming anything. (As it turns out, we still may be related, just not with the ancestor we thought we both shared.)
The postcard was probably sent to the UK, but I would keep an open mind. ;)
-
I agree that the postcard was more than likely mailed to the UK. However, when I was a child and visiting Ireland, my mum met whom we thought was a distant relative. For 30 years we thought we knew how we were related. About 5 years ago I found out we were not related by the common ancestor "John". Ever since then, I've been very careful about assuming anything. (As it turns out, we still may be related, just not with the ancestor we thought we both shared.)
The postcard was probably sent to the UK, but I would keep an open mind. ;)
Agreed!
There's really no way of ever finding out.The card could have been anywhere since c1915!